[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Police clash with pro-Palestine protesters on Ohio State University campus Joe Rogan Experience #2138 - Tucker Carlson Police Dispersing Student Protesters at USC - Breaking News Coverage (College Protests) What Passover Means For The New Testament Believer Are We Closer Than Ever To The Next Pandemic? War in Ukraine Turns on Russia what happened during total solar eclipse Israel Attacks Iran, Report Says - LIVE Breaking News Coverage Earth is Scorched with Heat Antiwar Activists Chant ‘Death to America’ at Event Featuring Chicago Alderman Vibe Shift A stream that makes the pleasant Rain sound. Older Men - Keep One Foot In The Dark Ages When You Really Want to Meet the Diversity Requirements CERN to test world's most powerful particle accelerator during April's solar eclipse Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks Questioning the Big Bang James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go Early humans had sex with chimps O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp. Biblical Contradictions (Alleged) Catholic Church Praising Lucifer Raising the Knife One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make.. Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship) Chinese Illegal Alien. I'm here for the moneuy Red Tides Plague Gulf Beaches Tucker Carlson calls out Nikki Haley, Ben Shapiro, and every other person calling for war: {Are there 7 Deadly Sins?} I’ve heard people refer to the “7 Deadly Sins,” but I haven’t been able to find that sort of list in Scripture. Abomination of Desolation | THEORY, BIBLE STUDY Bible Help Libertysflame Database Updated Crush EVERYONE with the Alien Gambit! Vladimir Putin tells Tucker Carlson US should stop arming Ukraine to end war Putin hints Moscow and Washington in back-channel talks in revealing Tucker Carlson interview Trump accuses Fulton County DA Fani Willis of lying in court response to Roman's motion Mandatory anti-white racism at Disney. Iceland Volcano Erupts For Third Time In 2 Months, State Of Emergency Declared Tucker Carlson Interview with Vladamir Putin How will Ar Mageddon / WW III End? What on EARTH is going on in Acts 16:11? New Discovery! 2023 Hottest in over 120 Million Years 2024 and beyond in prophecy Questions This Speech Just Broke the Internet Status: Not Logged In; Sign In International News See other International News Articles Title: Trump Launches Missile Strikes on Syria After Chemical Attack Source: [None] URL Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti ... as-expectations-of-strike-grow Published: Apr 13, 2018 Author: Jennifer Jacobs, Donna Nabu-Nasr, Daniel Post Date: 2018-04-13 21:29:24 by A K A Stone Keywords: None Views: 6264 Comments: 82 President Donald Trump said he launched missile strikes on Syria in retaliation for an apparent chemical attack by the regime of Bashar al-Assad on a rebel town. Trump said the missile strikes, which were focused on chemical weapons sites, would be carried out in coordination with France and the U.K. and he made clear that the U.S. is prepared to sustain the strikes until Syria stops using chemical weapons. The president also blasted Iraq and Russia for supporting Assad’s regime, particularly in the wake of the chemical attack. Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread   Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 71. #1. To: A K A Stone (#0) I sure hope he has the evidence to back it up paraclete  posted on  2018-04-13   21:41:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #32. To: paraclete (#1) I sure hope he has the evidence to back it up. He has nothing but rumor. Trump is a blasted, damned fool! Who needs evidence at a time such as this. All you need is supposition and bull shit to do what you want, including get us into WW111. rlk  posted on  2018-04-14   18:18:01 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #33. To: rlk (#32) all you need is supposition and bull shit to do what you want, including get us into WW111. Yes Trump is a tool of the military/industrial complex. He has made a restrained response which will be taken as weakness by Assad and Putin. Madam May is making much of the opportunity to ramp up the rhetoric against the Russians linking gas in Syria to nerve agents in the UK paraclete  posted on  2018-04-14   18:52:41 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #34. To: paraclete (#33) He has made a restrained response which will be taken as weakness by Assad and Putin. Assad and Putin are very, very smart (they would not be where they are, if they didn't). They understand the situation of Trump well. probably they sympathize with him. A Pole  posted on  2018-04-14   19:14:16 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #35. To: A Pole (#34) Assad and Putin are very, very smart Putin might be smart or just cunning, Assad didn't get the job by being smart, like Kim he took over from his daddy and has succeeded in pissing off his people, not smart, devastating his country, not smart paraclete  posted on  2018-04-14   21:40:50 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #39. To: paraclete, Vicomte13, Tooconservative, sneakypete, Pinguinite (#35) Assad didn't get the job by being smart, like Kim he took over from his daddy and has succeeded in pissing off his people, not smart, devastating his country, not smart I wonder how long you would last in his place, I think couple days at most. You have a set of templates from the cartoons and more cheesy Hollywood movies and are conditioned like a Pavlovian dog. You cannot point to a country on the map or spell its name, but you know the character of the rogue leader better than his closest family. Strange thing, each of those designated rogues is IDENTICAL to the others. Saddam, Milosevic, Allende, Noriega, Milosevic, Putin, Kim, ... No matter that earlier they could have had a different role assigned, memory is flexible. A Pole  posted on  2018-04-15   4:31:22 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #44. To: A Pole, paraclete, Vicomte13, sneakypete, Pinguinite (#39) (Edited) Assad didn't get the job by being smart, like Kim he took over from his daddy and has succeeded in pissing off his people, not smart, devastating his country, not smart Assad was not expected to take over the regime, his brother who got killed was groomed for the role, much as Joe Kennedy Junior was the son that old Joe wanted to run for prez. When he got killed in the remote-controlled bomber over England, JFK was his father's pick to run for prez. Assad did become a qualified ophthalmologist after medical training in Britain. I never read any complaints about his professional qualifications so he must have been fairly bright and had basic competence. And he does seem to be pretty intelligent, maybe a little on the autism scale. Something about his appearance and behavior makes me think that when I do see him on TV, despite how carefully they control any video of him that we can see in the West. However, Assad is the figurehead of his country's military/political elite. Exactly as Kim Jong-Il is. In either case, even if we drove the "dictator" from power, the (primarily) military regime would simply select another figurehead as ruler. There is no other way to rule a country that is so culturally and religiously divided as Syria is. In some respects, Putin plays the same role in Russia. He just didn't inherit the role from Daddy. If you want an American example of this, look at how Rand Paul mostly inherited his father's political base. And Rand is, like Assad, an ophthalmologist. Tooconservative  posted on  2018-04-15   13:49:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #45. To: Tooconservative (#44) Assad was not expected to take over the regime, his brother who got killed was groomed for the role, much as Joe Kennedy Junior was the son that old Joe wanted to run for prez. When he got killed in the remote-controlled bomber over England, JFK was his father's pick to run for prez. Assad did become a qualified ophthalmologist after medical training in Britain. I never read any complaints about his professional qualifications so he must have been fairly bright and had basic competence. And he does seem to be pretty intelligent, maybe a little on the autism scale. Something about his appearance and behavior makes me think that when I do see him on TV, despite how carefully they control any video of him that we can see in the West. However, Assad is the figurehead of his country's military/political elite. Exactly as Kim Jong-Il is. In either case, even if we drove the "dictator" from power, the (primarily) military regime would simply select another figurehead as ruler. There is no other way to rule a country that is so culturally and religiously divided as Syria is. In some respects, Putin plays the same role in Russia. He just didn't inherit the role from Daddy. If you want an American example of this, look at how Rand Paul mostly inherited his father's political base. And Rand is, like Assad, an ophthalmologist. Why is America involved with Syria? buckeroo  posted on  2018-04-15   13:55:11 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #46. To: buckeroo (#45) It's...complicated. Trump wants out. But he also doesn't want to look weak. He isn't the first prez with exactly this problem. Tooconservative  posted on  2018-04-15   14:00:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #47. To: Tooconservative (#46) It's...complicated. How does American involvement in Syrian internal affairs ensure a defensive posture for Americans? Did they bomb the USA or were the USA invited by Syria to be there? buckeroo  posted on  2018-04-15   14:08:19 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #51. To: buckeroo (#47) They slaughter their own people and support terrorism against our allies. Therefore, their government needs to go. Also, if the government is overthrown and replaced with something more pro-American, the Russian base there can be closed - and that is the only Russian naval anchorage in the Mediterranean. Poor Russians. Vicomte13  posted on  2018-04-15   21:50:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #52. To: Vicomte13 (#51) Also, if the government is overthrown and replaced with something more pro-American, the Russian base there can be closed - and that is the only Russian naval anchorage in the Mediterranean. Poor Russians. The poor Russians have enough nukes to virtually destroy the entire USA and probably Europe too, so they are not that "poor". Best not to attempt to back a nuke power into a corner. And they have the Crimea back, so they still have Met access. Pinguinite  posted on  2018-04-15   21:58:56 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #54. To: Pinguinite (#52) The poor Russians have enough nukes to virtually destroy the entire USA and probably Europe too, so they are not that "poor". Best not to attempt to back a nuke power into a corner. And they have the Crimea back, so they still have Met access. As I said: their military option is to blow up the world, including themselves. Sure, they can commit suicide (and wake up in Hell after doing it), but they don't have any option. As far as Med access goes, take another look at the map. Sevastopol is on the Black Sea. To get to the Med they have to steam through the Dardanelles inside of NATO ally Turkey. And once they get to the other side, in the NATO-ally Greece's private lake called the Aegean, with Syria gone they have nowhere to base, nowhere to refuel, nowhere to repair. Their underway replenishment capability is very weak. So sure, they can send a fleet past Istanbul, in peacetime, and float around in the Med until they run out of fuel and food. They can't stay there very long, and in a war scenario, they can't get their fleet out of the Black Sea, or back into it if it's in the Med. The loss of Syria would be a massive blow to their strategic position. They need to negotiate. I'm sure that leaving them a Guantanamo Bay type of arrangement regarding their Syrian base can be worked out that doesn't require Assad to sit there. But maybe not. Poor Russia has nuclear weapons - and that's all they've got. Nuclear weapons give them the option of being a suicide bomber - blowing up the whole world, themselves included - in a tantrum. They would do that if armies were closing in on Moscow. So would the French is armies were closing in on Paris. But over Syria? Nah. The Russians will not commit suicide over Syria. They'll take their lumps and be angry and move on. Vicomte13  posted on  2018-04-16   7:48:27 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #60. To: Vicomte13, TooConservative (#54) As I said: their military option is to blow up the world, including themselves. Sure, they can commit suicide (and wake up in Hell after doing it), but they don't have any option. When you "corner"someone, that's when they run out of options. Turkey is not exactly a foe of Russia. Russia is selling them S-300 systems, much to the chagrin of the US. The loss of Syria would be a massive blow to their strategic position. They need to negotiate. Putin WANTS to negotiate. But it's the west that is completely refusing to do so. Putin instead simply being push and shoved, again and again and again. The west doesn't care at all about anything Putin has to say. According to the west, "negotiation" means only one thing: Shut up, get back in the fucking line and do what we say! And you *know* that's true. Latest word on Skripal case: The chem used was not Novichok. It was instead something called "BZ", which was known to be developed only in NATO countries and the USA. That bolsters Russia's claim of non-involvement, and compromises the west's decision to expel the 120 or so diplomats by not only the US & UK, but a dozen or more other western allies that are at risk of being severely embarrassed as having been proven to be mere puppets of the USA. And we'll see what the International inspectors will say about Douma. Russia has boldly claimed there is no evidence any chem attack even occurred. What's in the videos we've all seen could have been merely a hysteria response, if not staged outright. The "disturbing" video doesn't even show a single person or child suffering any effects of any chemical agent. It shows only a few adults and kids getting watered down and administered eye drops and inhalers. Poor Russia has nuclear weapons - and that's all they've got. That's not exactly true. It seems to me Russia has focused their much smaller military budget on strategic offensive weaponry and tactical defensive weaponry, mainly in missile and torpedo tech. They may well be leading the world in such areas. And that's to be expected as they simply don't have the budget to spend money on boondoggle projects as the US is doing with the F-35 program. The US invests in military areas they believe will help them push their influence offensively worldwide. New carriers, big fleets. The Russians instead are investing in tech that can sink fleets, which is much cheaper than the fleets themselves. Will they use it? Doubtful. Just as the USA will, doubtfully, attack Russia outright. But you know what Vic? Maybe the best advantage Russia has is, is in the so-called "propaganda" war. Russia is gaining sympathy and the US is losing it. I'll use myself in this example. I'm pissed off. I'm pissed at Trump. I was his supporter. Whereas before I was enthusiastic about Trump beating Hillary, I'm now taking a "what can be salvaged" type view of Trump. I find myself instead viewing Putin and Assad as underdogs and victims of a huge misinformation campaign and war promoted by a very real Deep State that has successfully taken Trump down. I, as an American citizen who has never set foot in Russia, on an emotional level have almost completely sided with Russia and Putin, that based on my sickening disappointment with the absolute injustice dispensed on Putin and Assad with with what I see as non-credible accusations of their using chem weapons in the UK and now Douma, both accusations not making any sense whatsoever for their complete lack of credible motive. And while I don't believe that there is a large segment of Americans that feel the degree of sympathy for Assad and Putin as I do right now, there's no question that Trump has disappointed a great many of his supporters with this Syrian strike as it violated everything he passionately broadcast as a candidate. In my view, this stike on Syria did more damage to Trump's support base than it did to Syria. What's happening is that Trump's support base is changing and I'll use TooConservative here as an example, without his permission and in accordance with my own recollection. TC hated trump with an absolute passion. He didn't vote for him. He could not say enough things here on this very forum about how disgusting he was. After Trump won, TC did a flip on these negative sentiments, and I gather from his posts that he approves of the strike on Syria and is probably now a dedicated fan. I think TC represents more of the traditional Republican Bush-supporter type base, as perhaps you do as well, and I represented the base that was opposed to the Deep State, the swamp and all it represents. But it was my base that put Trump in office, not TC's. And now Trump has traded his original support base that won him the presidency for the Bush-era base that failed against Obama. As I see it, you two are cheering for the Deep State swamp, Bush era war mongering, and I by contrast, have virtually transferred all sympathy I once had for US interests to Russia. How many more are like me? That's a good question, but I know I'm not alone. Putin still has his naysayers here on this very forum who simply write off Putin as a former KGB agent who will perpetually be up to Soviet era domination for as long as he lives. I would speculate that there's not 1 American in 100 who hates Putin who has ever heard a single word the man has had to say. But that's changing. I do believe Putin is, in spite of his history, a reasonably good guy, that based on what I have taken the time to actually hear him say (translated of course). He does not want world war. He does not want confrontation with the west. He is doing the best he can against a juggernaut of fake news and an American Deep State beast that has conscripted even the defiant Trump into it's array of swamp minions. So when one tallies up the strengths & weaknesses of Russia vs the USA, do take public sentiment into consideration along with all that goes with it, and not just military capability. So I'll have a toast to Putin and Assad. May they prevail. Pinguinite  posted on  2018-04-16   11:07:00 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #65. To: Pinguinite, TooConservative (#60) As I see it, you two are cheering for the Deep State swamp, Bush era war mongering, and I by contrast, have virtually transferred all sympathy I once had for US interests to Russia. I will let TC speak for himself, and he has. As for me, if you're seeing a Republican here, you're misreading me. I'm not a Republican. Nor am I a Democrat. I'm not an independent by cussedness - I would happily join a party that stood for the things I think are important, but neither do. So my voting reflects a "best on offer" approach. Usually that's the Republicans, though when Ross Perot ran the first time, he was. The things I think are important cut across party lines, and some of them are supported by neither party. Both parties pay lip service to some of them. The majority of Americans do not agree with most of them, so I recognize that I am not going see political victory on several of these them, and maybe any of them, in my lifetime, and maybe not until the end of the world. If there were another country where I could have these things, I would consider emigrating. One of the things that is important to me relates to foreign policy and killing people. As my own views are not the policy purpose of any of the parties or players, there's no point in my elaborating. Suffice it to say that I am in favor of removing murderous dictators, for a variety of reasons, and I think that the current state of Iraq and Libya are both preferable to what existed there under their strongmen. To me, it has nothing to do with the Deep State. Vicomte13  posted on  2018-04-16   12:42:10 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #71. To: Vicomte13 (#65) I think that the current state of Iraq and Libya are both preferable to what existed there under their strongmen. You must be kidding A Pole  posted on  2018-04-16   15:33:23 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   Replies to Comment # 71.         There are no replies to Comment # 71. End Trace Mode for Comment # 71. Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]  Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com